Greetings!

Hi
Welcome to Morcan Books & Films, the blog devoted to providing a unique perspective and intelligent commentary on books and films. It includes commentary on our own books and films – i.e. novels and screenplays co-written by the Morcans, and feature films produced by, or in development with, Morcan Motion Pictures.
Lance & James

Follow Blog via Email

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

In December 2013, Elizabeth Alexandra Mary Windsor, better known as Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, made world headlines over a trivial incident at London’s Buckingham Palace. It was reported the Queen was irate over policemen deployed to the palace who repeatedly helped themselves to nuts meant for guests.

Newspapers around the world ran headlines such as: “Queen not so nuts about ‘snacking’ policemen” and “Britain’s Queen Elizabeth goes nuts over nibbles at Buckingham Palace”.

Such headlines are typical portrayals of Her Majesty, implying she’s an eccentric old lady and some relic of another era. She is regularly presented as being nothing more than a symbolic figurehead who, apart from attending functions when duty calls, does little but walk her corgis and sip tea all day.

A young Queen Elizabeth II at her coronation in 1953

Despite the absence of Queen Elizabeth II’s name in annual Forbes Rich Lists, everyone in the room was aware the Queen was one of the wealthiest people in the world, if not the wealthiest. However, hers and the House of Windsor’s assets and income were mostly non-declared. –The Orphan Factory

It’s also a commonly held belief that the Queen’s House of Windsor clan is a Royal Family in decline, desperately clinging to the past.

This concept would have been further solidified no doubt by an Agencies report dated January 29, 2014, advising that “the Queen’s household finances are at a ‘historic low’ with just 1 million pounds sterling in reserve, with courtiers advised to take money-saving tips from the Treasury”.

The same report advises that “the parliamentary public accounts committee found the Queen’s advisers were failing to control her finances while her palaces were crumbling”.

However, there is another take on this iconic lady who is one of history’s longest reigning monarchs. This alternative viewpoint suggests the public have been deceived into believing the Queen is just a vestige of the once powerful British Empire and no longer has any real authority.

According to this conspiracy theory,the Windsors have not yet passed their peak. On the contrary, they are richer and more powerful than ever. The only difference is they now reign, not rule. But that’s merely semantics, these conspiracy theorists argue, for the Queen actually makes a myriad of executive decisions and freely operates above presidents and prime ministers.

Contrary to the myth that the British Royals were no longer all-powerful, it was common knowledge within Omega and other organizations in the know that they remained one of the most dominant forces on the planet. The Royals were totally comfortable with the mass populace believing they’d passed their heyday. That belief allowed them to control things behind the scenes with effortless ease. And control they did, in every way imaginable. –The Orphan Factory

Undeclared fortunes

It has been purported by financial researchers and alternative media outlets that there are individuals whose net worth would dwarf whoever tops the Forbes Rich List at any given time – net worth the likes of Bill Gates, Warren Buffett or Carlos Slim Helu could only dream about.

This may be hard to fathom, but it’s important to consider two points when analyzing the finances of the global elite.

Firstly, without being able to inspect the bank accounts of billionaires, Forbes and similar Rich List publishers can only make crude guesstimates of individuals’ true worth. As a result, their lists are anything but official and their accuracy is questionable – something the billionaire community is quick to point out.

Secondly, beyond those individuals and sums mentioned on the Rich Lists, there exists what is often referred to as invisible or hiddenwealth. This involves non-disclosed fortunes that are virtually impossible to detect. The planet’s invisible wealth is comprised of undeclared income stashed away in offshore tax havens and Swiss bank accounts, secret Old World money and black market economies in which criminal enterprises conduct their business.

The criminal enterprises referred to include illegal drugs and arms dealing. One such arms dealer is Saudi Arabian Adnan Khashoggi who some banking and financial commentators estimate had a massive personal fortune of between US$2 trillion and US$7 trillion in the 1980’s.

However, the world is still waiting for its first official trillionaire, and Khashoggi’s fortune was only ever estimated by Forbes and the likes to be worth between $400 million and several billion. If the rumors of Khashoggi’s multi-trillion dollar personal fortune were true then there’s an extremely wide gulf separating unofficial and official estimates of his wealth.

The 2005 feature film Lord of War, directed by Andrew Niccol and starring Nicolas Cage and Ethan Hawke, is said to have been inspired by Russian arms dealer Viktor Bout. Like Khashoggi, Bout is rumored to have amassed a huge personal fortune impossible to estimate. Cage’s character, a Ukranian-American arms dealer, is shown in the movie to be above the law with apparently unlimited money and resources.

Blockbuster inspired by another wealthy arms dealer.

Former Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos is another individual strongly rumored to have profited from the black market. As mentioned in chapter 6, many who have investigated Marcos, including politicians in the current Philippine government, say much of his wealth was secured from discoveries of Yamashita’s Gold. As the existence of those treasures was never acknowledged by any government, it’s conceivable President Marcos could have amassed a large fortune impossible to trace or estimate. Some investigators say his secret bank accounts amounted to trillions of dollars.

If this sounds totally unbelievable, consider the television interview Imelda Marcos gave in 2009 for the BBC TV travel series Explore. While being filmed inside her lavish home in the Philippines, Imelda told BBC presenter Simon Reeve that her late husband was heavily associated with gold mining companies and also traded in gold. The former First Lady then presented Reeve with an official document. Although she would not allow the document itself to be filmed, Reeve confirmed it was a Certificate of Deposit made by Ferdinand E. Marcos in a bank in Brussels, Belgium, for the amount of Nine Hundred and Eighty Seven Billion United States Dollars. For those who don’t have a good math brain, that’s only 13 billion short of a trillion bucks.

If true, this sum in Marcos’ Belgium bank account alone would be almost 13 times more than Bill Gates’ total current fortune. The legacy of the former president becomes even more staggering when considering that this was just one of his bank accounts; the Philippine government has confirmed through investigations of its own that Marcos had many such secret accounts in banks all over the world.

Sticking with the idea that there are individuals worth far more than the names topping official rich lists, some say the Queen is one of the wealthiest people, if not the wealthiest, in the world. In The Orphan Factory we run with this theory by referring to secret Royal assets and undeclared income of unimaginable proportions.

The special agent had often told his orphans that in her capacity as the reigning monarch of the Commonwealth nations, the Queen had legitimate business interests in the pharmaceutical, banking and mineral industries in most or all of those countries. No small cheese considering those nations included mineral-rich Canada and Australia as well as India and numerous African states. –The Orphan Factory

The might of the Commonwealth

To get a sense of how wealthy and powerful the Queen really is, you must first study the Commonwealth and Her Majesty’s role as head of it. Previously known as the British Commonwealth, the Commonwealth is basically what’s left of the old British Empire that once ruled much of the world. As the various territories, or colonies, gained their independence, most became member states of the Commonwealth.

Queen Elizabeth…one of the longest reigning monarchs.

Queen Elizabeth II has been Head of the Commonwealth since her accession to the throne in 1952. As the multi-country union was only formally constituted in 1949, the Commonwealth and the Queen are in many ways inseparable.

The Commonwealth today.

With almost a third of the world’s population and a quarter of the Earth’s land mass, the Commonwealth spans all seven continents. In 2012, this intergovernmental organization produced almost $10 trillion in Gross Domestic Product, or GDP. In terms of population, wealth, mineral resources and land mass, the Commonwealth forms a big chunk of the planet.

Today, 53 countries remain in the Commonwealth. Members include such powerhouse nations as the United Kingdom, Canada, India, Australia, South Africa, Malaysia and Pakistan. Other nations include Bangladesh, Singapore, Kenya, Nigeria, New Zealand, Sri Lanka, Cameroon, Jamaica and numerous other Caribbean countries.

In addition to being head of the Commonwealth of Nations, the Queen is the constitutional monarch of 16 sovereign states known as the Commonwealth realms where her powers are magnified.

For example, her official title in Australia is as follows: “Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God, Queen of Australia and Her other Realms and Territories, Head of the Commonwealth.”

Her title as Queen and Head of Canada is almost identical to her title in Australia.

In a similar vein to the US Federal Reserve, the central banks of various Commonwealth realms such as New Zealand, Canada and Australia are officially titled ‘Crown corporations’ and by and large operate independently of those countries’ governments. Some commentators have argued this banking loop-hole allows the Queen to quietly but methodically maintain control of these nations’ finances.

The House of Windsor’s business activities were, of course, under the radar and not on the record, just as its operations in larger Commonwealth nations like Australia and Canada were also never reported. –The Orphan Factory

The Queen’s representatives in Commonwealth realms like Canada, Australia, Jamaica and New Zealand are known as Governor-Generals, reflecting Her Majesty’s supreme authority. What most citizens of these countries don’t realize is that the Queen’s powers extend over and above elected prime ministers.

This little known fact reared its ugly head in 1975 when Australia’s elected Prime Minister Gough Whitlam was unceremoniously removed by then Governor-General Sir John Kerr. This was done at the behest of the Queen.

Prime Minister Whitlam had this to say to the press after being dismissed from office: “Well may we say God save the Queen, because nothing will save the Governor-General!”

Some researchers speculated the Whitlam Government’s policies were interfering with the Queen’s extensive business interests in Australia. It’s plausible policies that were called radical, Far Left and anti-business – as Whitlam’s policies were labeled by Australian and international media – could curtail profitability of Her Majesty’s vast enterprises.

Besides the Queen’s orders to dismiss Prime Minister Whitlam from office, there is a thread of evidence to suggest the CIA was also involved in Whitlam’s dismissal.

In 2010, a similar political event occurred in Australia when Kevin Rudd, the country’s elected Prime Minister, was abruptly replaced by fellow Labour Party MP Julia Gillard even though his popularity with the public was at a record high. Many citizens protested and some political analysts claimed it was unconstitutional to remove an elected PM from office. The Governor-General, however, did not intervene.

Interestingly, Rudd was in the process of implementing legislation to increase taxes on offshore mining companies to withhold more of the nation’s mineral riches for the Australian people. This legislation would have included higher taxes for Rio Tinto, the multi-national metals and mining corporation the Queen owns the majority of shares in.

As well as being able to replace prime ministers, Her Majesty has the authority in Commonwealth countries to dissolve Parliament and call elections any time she so desires, refuse to approve any legislation she doesn’t agree with and even pardon convicted criminals.

The leaders of all 53 Commonwealth countries officially swear an Oath of Allegiance to the Queen. Those who do not swear this oath are deemed unfit for office. Besides politicians, all public servants, lawyers, judges, police and military personnel are also forced to swear this oath. And new citizens of Commonwealth nations must swear an oath of allegiance to the Queen.

Bottom line is the Queen has absolute power throughout much of the mighty Commonwealth. Furthermore, she is unelected and unaccountable.

The reality was the Windsors had their fingers in many pies and had a huge say in global affairs. At home, they dictated to the British Parliament, and no elected Prime Minister could take up office without first pledging total allegiance to the Queen and future King. To Kentbridge’s way of thinking, that proved Britain was no more a democracy than was the United States. –The Orphan Factory

The Queen’s position in modern Britain

In her native Britain the Queen also has more powers assigned to her than the average journalist, and certainly the average British citizen, seems to realize. This lack of awareness of the Queen’s true powers is possibly due to the fact that she rarely exercises her authority and only seems to do so when there’s no alternative.

Nevertheless, the powers she has could be argued to be undemocratic given she is non-elected and received her authority by birth – all of which sound like the antithesis of a democracy.

This sentiment was echoed by Graham Smith, chief executive of Republic, a British group which campaigns for an alternative to the monarchy. In an article by CNN (London) on June 1, 2012, Smith described the British Monarchy as being highly “secretive”.

Anti-Monarchist Graham Smith critical of the Crown’s “vast powers”.

“Having recently lobbied successfully to have itself removed entirely from the reaches of our Freedom of Information laws,” Smith stated, “it lobbies government ministers for improvements to its financial benefits and for its own private agenda.”

Smith continued, “The queen and Prince Charles must be asked for consent before our elected parliament is able to debate any legislation that affects their private interests … The “Crown” is the supreme authority in this country – not the people. The Crown has vast powers that cannot be challenged in a court of law and those powers are exercised by the queen on the instruction of our prime minister”.

The CNN article also mentioned the Queen’s ability to appoint government ministers and other public servants, as well as “the power to go to war, sign treaties and change the law through the little-understood Privy Council”.

Conspiracy theorists believe the Queen’s imperceptible wealth – the unknown element that apparently forms the bulk of her true net worth – goes hand in hand with her rarely acknowledged political powers in Britain and throughout much of the world.

According to this theory, the Queen’s overall’s wealth can essentially be compartmentalized into three separate categories: the Monarch, her visible fortune and, lastly and most importantly, her invisible fortune.

The Monarch

Much of Her Majesty’s net worth is said to be derived from the Commonwealth and includes millions of acres of Crown land and thousands of Crown companies. In Britain alone, the Monarch’s assets are colossal. On May 8, 2011, British newspaper The Telegraph reported the Crown Estate consisted of “a vast property empire dating back to the records of William the Conqueror in the Domesday Book of 1086”.

The Domesday Book is an ancient account of all the holdings of England.

The Monarch’s diverse UK assets range from Ascot Racecourse to London’s prime real estate district of Regent Street to shopping malls and industrial estates. It also owns a large percentage of Britain’s forests, farmland and estates, and the majority of Britain’s coastline, not to mention the rights to all the land’s gold and silver discoveries.

As the reigning British Monarch, the Queen is also the Supreme Governor of the Church of England, which may or may not carry financial rewards either directly or indirectly. For Christian readers this may seem to be a blasphemous statement, but consider the vast financial empire of the Vatican. Granted, the Church of England is not the Catholic Church, but it could still be enormously wealthy in its own right with centuries-old assets.

Officially speaking, the Monarch’s assets and revenues are separate to the Queen’s personal net worth. However, the two overlap and are not mutually exclusive.

Visible personal fortune

The Queen’s known fortune was initially accumulated by indulging in tax-free investing during her first 40 years on the throne. In 1992, a law change required Her Majesty to pay taxes like any other British citizen. However, that did not curtail her business activities in the slightest.

Queen Elizabeth’s empire includes hundreds of residences worldwide, including palaces and castles; there’s also yachts, race horses, fleets of Bentleysand Rolls-Royces, tens of thousands of old masterpiece paintings and other prized artworks, the world’s biggest collection of jewels, a gold carriage and billions of shares in blue chip multinational companies; Her Majesty’s investment portfolio includes large shareholdings in major companies like Rio Tinto, General Electric, British Petroleum, Royal Dutch Shell and many other multinational corporations.

The queen’s golden carriage – valued at 28 million pounds.

Now how many of the world’s so-called wealthiest do you think have these kinds of assets? And keep in mind, all this is merely her known fortune. It has been claimed by many researchers that these official assets comprise a small percentage of her overall wealth.

Kentbridge had also told the orphans it was a commonly held belief within Omega that the Queen bankrolled and reaped the rewards from other far more secretive ventures worldwide. As for the exact nature of those other ventures, nobody in the agency knew. –The Orphan Factory

Invisible personal fortune

In a case of but wait there’s more, the Queen’s hidden assets are rumored to dwarf her known ones, which would likely make her the richest person on earth.

The majority of the Queen’s wealth is said to be inherited money. After all, the British Royals descend from elite European families in a centuries-old empire that reaped the spoils of Ancient Rome, the Crusades and splits in the Vatican.

King James 1 (1566-1625)…one of the more extravagant British Royals.

We are talking serious Old World money here. The Queen’s ancestors not only owned untold mineral resources throughout the known world, but were also instrumental in setting up the earliest banks and controlling money supplies and lending. And the British House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha – since renamed theHouse of Windsor – actively supported and profited from nefarious but extremely lucrative historical events like the opium trade in China as well as slave-trading.

Certain theorists suggest gold alone in the Royal Family’s possession is said to be worth well over a trillion pounds. If true, most of this is likely to be inherited gold.

Some investigators, journalists and even EU politicians have over the years claimed the family’s dirty business didn’t end with the Opium Wars or the trading of African slaves. They’ve suggested the House of Windsor also participates in the industries of drug trafficking, arms trading and the landmine manufacturing, using middle men or intermediaries in order to never leave any royal trace.

For example, The Guardian reported on March 30, 2012 that the candidate for the 2012 French presidential election, Jacques Cheminade, accused the Queen of amassing a drug money fortune. The article summarized Cheminade as theorizing that “Queen Elizabeth II owes her fortune to drug money”.

“There are many other sources,” the French politician was reported by The Guardian as saying, “but it’s a series of trafficking operations within which, yes, there were drugs.”

Speculation that the Queen is the richest person alive also points to the long-rumored existence of bank accounts in the name of Her Majesty in various tax havens. The plot of Roger Donaldson’s 2008 heist thriller The Bank Job, starring Jason Statham, may vaguely allude to these secret offshore bank accounts.

This true story film highlights a grand conspiracy involving MI5, elite bankers and the British Royals. Perhaps tellingly, it shows the Queen’s younger sister, Princess Margaret, in a scandalous situation in the Caribbean island nation and renowned tax haven of Trinidad and Tobago.

Some independent researchers even say the Crown technically owns the City of London, the world’s finance capital. Tied into this theory is the idea that the Windsors are senior players in the manipulation of global financial markets.

It’s also worth noting the Queen has proven herself to be a highly effective investor and is regularly advised by her close circle of elite bankers, billionaire industrialists and leading politicians. She is exposed to State secrets and other privileged information.

When Her Majesty balances Royal duties and personal investing, we wonder whether she ever finds herself veering into conflict of interest territory?

Perhaps she never worries about such matters because British laws protect the Monarchy from prosecution or even any form of investigation. The Queen is therefore completely immune to such accusations.

This point was touched on by British pioneer organic farmer and social activist Julian Rose in an article he wrote for the non-profit news site Activist Post on June 12, 2012.

“The wealthiest woman in the World,” Rose wrote, “Elizabeth Windsor owns one sixth of the land mass of our planet. A big Estate, it consists of Canada, Australia and the United Kingdom plus many more smaller ‘Commonwealth’ fiefdoms. Her Crown Estate does not attract Inheritance or Capital Gains Tax … According to Lord Halsbury in Laws of the Land ‘The sovereign can do no wrong and no laws can be brought against her’.”

When attempting to figure out the Queen’s true net worth, you must also factor in that her husband, Prince Philip, is the unofficial leader of the mysterious Club of the Isles. A cagey oligarchy of European industrialists and aristocrats, the club is rumored to preside over approximately US$10 trillion in global assets. Companies said to be associated with the Club of the Isles include Royal Dutch Shell, The Bank of England, Lloyds Bank, SmithKline Beecham, General Electric, Barclays Bank, Rio Tinto, HSBC, BHP Billiton and DeBeers.

Researchers who believe there is a vast reservoir of undeclared Royal assets, have estimated the Queen’s worth between US$11 trillion and US$30 trillion. Compare this to the world’s official richest person who, as at the start of 2014, was Microsoft founder Bill Gates. Forbes’ estimate of his worth was a paltry US$76 billion. Some would say that’s how much the Queen makes annually in bank interest alone.

Naylor himself claimed to have witnessed one of the Queen’s offshore bank accounts whose value was in the hundreds of billions. –The Orphan Factory

“All the democracies are bankrupt now”

In an informal, but recorded chat with President Reagan aboard the royal yacht Britannia off the coast of Florida in 1991, Queen Elizabeth II said something intriguing. Responding to Reagan’s expressed desire to cut costs and scale back government, Her Majesty replied, “Well, you see, all the democracies are bankrupt now”.

That was a surprisingly opinionated socio-economic commentary for an old lady some would have us believe is out of touch with the modern world. And starting a sentence with “Well, you see” when addressing the 40th President of the United States of America seems patronizing as, indeed, does her tone throughout the entire filmed discussion. At least to our ears it does.

Immediately after informing Reagan that “all the democracies are bankrupt now,” Her Majesty added, “because of the way the services are being planned for people to grab”.

The Queen and President Reagan…like minds.

In the footage, Reagan can be seen nodding enthusiastically. No doubt he’d found a like mind in the Queen as he was notorious for keeping a tight reign on America’s purse strings during his time in office, especially with respect to social services.

Reagan’s political stance during his two terms in office had been mirrored on the other side of the Atlantic, in Britain, where British PM Margaret Thatcher drastically slashed public services and welfare for the poor.

It’s not too much of an assumption to believe the Queen’s opinions on the dangers of providing people with welfare services stems from Britain’s ugly class system. A system which for centuries dictated that the elite – including and especially the Royals – were entitled to almost everything and the commoners and the poor were left with scraps.

Judging by her comments, the Queen did not – and perhaps to this day does not – understand that welfare keeps millions afloat. It was, and is, the compassionate lifeline that civilized societies provide to assist those in genuine need. Yes, abuse of social welfare is rife, but the politics known as Thatcherism and Reaganism were not called brutal without reason.

Such comments about the lower classes by the Queen are not a one-off when it comes to the Windsors. In fact, they have sadly been echoed numerous times by the likes of the Queen’s husband Prince Philip and their son and first in line to the throne, Prince Charles, Prince of Wales.

Royal welfare benefits

The welfare benefits the Queen spoke so disparagingly of to President Reagan don’t seem to include those received a little closer to home. For the fact is, the Windsors receive their own form of welfare. It’s known as the Sovereign Grantand is paid for by the British Government.

That’s right. The Windsors’ lavish lifestyle is paid for by the British people!

However, the Government prefers to use the term “paid for by Parliament” rather than explicitly pointing out that taxpayers are the ones who foot the bill.

The Sovereign Grant, which until 2011 was known as the Civil List, amounts to multi-millions in annual handouts to the Queen and her family. This includes several million to Her Majesty annually as well as smaller but still sizeable payments to almost every other senior member of the Windsor family. A large percentage of the funds pay for salaries of Royal staff. The scheme also includes direct payments to distantly related Royals for performing official duties and attending functions.

Royal staffers ‘set tables’ in Buckingham Palace’s ballroom.

The Civil List dates back to 1689 when Parliament, on the accession of William and Mary, agreed to pay the Royal Family 600,000 British Pounds Sterling for Royal expenses. These were enormous sums in the 17th Century and it’s worth noting that before this date such expenses were paid almost entirely from the Monarch’s hereditary revenues.

Royal corruption in regards to the Civil List was not uncommon. For example, during his reign from 1760-1820, King George III used his annual sum of almost a million pounds sterling as a political weapon by rewarding his supporters in Parliament with under-the-table bribes and pensions.

Besides the Sovereign Grant, the British Parliament also forks out hundreds of millions more every year to preserve the Monarch. These expenses include maintenance fees for Buckingham Palace, the Royal yachts and the Royal train, airfares and other travel expenses as well as round-the-clock security. The aforementioned 2012 CNN article written by Graham Smith also mentioned the Monarchy costs British taxpayers £202 million, or approximately US$340 million, annually.

These vast sums of taxpayer money that are paid to the already flush Windsors reflect the warped priorities of the British welfare system – a system which deprives many impoverished families of all but the barest of essentials.

Of course, the grasping people Her Majesty alluded to in that informal talk with President Reagan don’t comprise the beneficiaries of the Sovereign Grant. In the Queen’s mind, a social security system for her uber-rich Royal clan is obviously much more moral and necessary than providing for the poor and those in genuine need.

Little wonder the Windsors have often been accused of being snobby elitists by the British public at large.

America’s relationship with Royalty

It has been claimed by various conspiracy theorists that all American Presidents are subservient to the House of Windsor and surreptitiously look after the interests of the British Royals. Some also claim that every US President in history – right up to and including Obama – is related by blood to the Windsors.

Whatever the case, it’s worth remembering America was founded upon a strong rebellion against Royalty and all it stood for. Hence the Founding Fathers adding that the United States was to be a nation “of the people, by the people and for the people” in the Constitution. No doubt they were mindful of the elitism of Britain where unelected families ruled the masses.

However, in recent decades many Americans seem to have become besotted by Royalty – especially since the glamorous Princess Diana and her sons Prince William and Prince Harry arrived on the scene. Not to forget William’s beautiful wife Kate Middleton and the new addition to their family.

Prince William and Kate wowed the American public.

Possibly, this infatuation has something to do with the fact that the US does not have any royals, and there’s a celebrity factor in British and European Royal Family members the American public can’t get enough of.

Yet, conversely, millions of the working class people in Britain either dislike or are indifferent to the Royals.

That has always been the way in Britain where the Royals are generally loved by the upper and middle classes, but often despised by the lower classes who claim the Royal Family’s sadly out of touch with them. This phenomenon could be seen whenever Queen Elizabeth’s great-great-grandmother, Queen Victoria, appeared in London in the 19th Century. The crowds would boo and shout insults at her. Historians believe this is one of the reasons Victoria fled to Balmoral, the Royals’ country estate in Scotland.

Actress Helen Mirren no fan of the Royals.

English actress Dame Helen Mirren, who won an Oscar for her portrayal of Queen Elizabeth II in the 2006 international box office hit The Queen, probably best summed up the Royals from the British public’s perspective. In an interview given on the eve of the release of The Queen, Mirren had the following to say: “I still loathe the British class system, and the Royal family are the apex of the British class system. It’s a system that I absolutely hate.”

Like most Third World countries, Guyana was susceptible to interference by influential nations. In this case, it was Britain which was intent on capitalizing on the wealth – such as it was – of one of its former colonies. –The Orphan Factory

Princess Diana’s butler

At Buckingham Palace in December 1997, Princess Diana’s butler Paul Burrell requested a meeting with the Queen. Burrell believed he’d found evidence of a possible conspiracy surrounding his former employer’s recent death and wanted to inform Her Majesty.

The following year, at a London Inquest into Diana’s death, Burrell stated that the Queen had warned him to “be careful” during their meeting of the year before. Burrell said the Queen had told him, “There are powers at work in this country of which we have no knowledge.”

Who those mysterious powers were, the Queen apparently did not elaborate. The former butler said he had no idea what Her Majesty was referring to, but he agreed to back off the case nevertheless.

Perhaps the faceless people the Queen eluded to confirms her standing at or near the zenith of the global elite, and perhaps she’s part of the “powers at work” that she referred to. If so, Her Majesty would obviously never reveal this to such a lowly person as Princess Diana’s butler.

Princess Diana…the speculaton continues.

(See chapter 23 for more on Princess Diana’s death).

#

At the end of the day, the Queen’s true wealth is probably too vast, complex and hidden for any outsider to ever accurately calculate. Therefore, her true net wealth, and that of her descendants, will probably forever remain a conspiracy theory.

And, of course, we could be totally wrong about everything we’ve written about the Queen and the British Royals. In which case it would probably be best you accept that invitation to Buckingham Palace…

If you do, please write to us and let us know what it was like to meet the Royal Family because we are pretty sure our own ship has sailed in that regard – especially now that this book has been published!